What do you think?
Rate this book
Framers: Human Advantage in an Age of Technology and Turmoil
A Financial Times and Economist Book of the Year'Wonderfully stimulating... will teach you to see around corners' - TIM HARFORD'A paean to cognitive agility and the elasticity of the imagination' - ECOMOMIST'Captivating... will transform the way you think' MARISSA KING, PROFESSOR AT YALE SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT The power of mental models to make better decisionsWe're often told that humans make bad decisions and that more data is better. But this is people are good at decisions precisely because we use mental models and can envision new realities outside of data. Great outcomes don't depend so much on the final moment of choosing but on generating better alternatives to choose between. That's framing. It's a cognitive muscle we can strengthen to improve our lives, work and future -- to meet this historical moment. Framers shows how.
260 pages, Kindle Edition
Published May 13, 2021
249 people are currently reading
2682 people want to read
About the author
Kenneth Cukier
9 books44 followersKENNETH CUKIER is a Senior Editor at The Economist and host of its weekly tech podcast Babbage. He is the coauthor of the NYT bestseller "Big Data." Cukier is an Associate Fellow at the University of Oxford’s Saïd Business School, and a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 67 reviews
December 20, 2021
A paean to the human ability to think creatively about the world we live in.
In my day job I teach Strategy and one of the first lessons is understanding the difference between a tactical and a strategic mindset. Tactical mindsets are rule-bound, situated in space and time. From a board game to a battlefield, the environment is largely static and the best responses can be laid out and worked through. Hence why computers are increasingly powerful in these fields.
Strategy is very different, because in a strategic mindset the rules are malleable and the space and time can be re-arranged. To be a strategist is to be a framer. Someone who can take what seems a static situation and re-imagine the context, guiding metaphors, underlying assumptions, question rules and re-situate in space and time to find a more advantageous situation.
As the authors argue, framing is one of the central analytical skills, and one that is uniquely human. Machines are very good rule-followers, they can experiment and learn, but they cannot break the rules that are set for them or assumed within their code. Humans by contrast do this all the time. When we tell a joke, we're relying on the gap between your anticipated frame and what we then say for the surprise and humor. Many leading businesses also reflect significant frames. Howard Schultz realised that a coffee shop wasn't simply a place that made and sold coffee, but could be a place you'd want to visit and spend time in, hence Starbucks. Sam Walton realised that the 'store' didn't have to just be a location but could be a network, hence the success of Walmart.
Framing is not a skill we teach very often outside strategy classrooms. And it does come with a few constraints some find uncomfortable. As the authors stress, the best conditions for framing require an environment of cognitive diversity. That means it's often a team effort. Then is the matter of who is involved. Diversity of physical and lived experience is important, though it's only a partial step towards the more important element of ensuring you get a range of people who think differently about problems. Then you shouldn't just force the team into a room to find a consensus, but encourage their diversity by working on the problem separately and identifying preferred outcomes. Finally, when they come together, there needs to be a willingness to disagree, and to value the development over time of ideas, rather than simply a rapid move to an outcome.
There are limits to what framing can do. It can't overcome all material realities, and there's a risk of assuming that mere cleverness can provide a way out in every situation. That's not always true, and sometimes reflects an indulgent wish to avoid facing up to the obvious problem (see the trend for hiring endless expensive consultants). And as the authors' warn, changing frames too often is also harmful. Just because something is new or 'contrarian' thinking doesn't automatically make it superior. Finally, the gap between thought and action needs to be overcome and some frames, however analytically appealing are less helpful, even harmful, at implementation.
Overall however, 'Framers' is a compelling read on the power of human thought, and a reason for optimism that we can and will find ways to muddle our way out of the mess we today find ourselves in.
In my day job I teach Strategy and one of the first lessons is understanding the difference between a tactical and a strategic mindset. Tactical mindsets are rule-bound, situated in space and time. From a board game to a battlefield, the environment is largely static and the best responses can be laid out and worked through. Hence why computers are increasingly powerful in these fields.
Strategy is very different, because in a strategic mindset the rules are malleable and the space and time can be re-arranged. To be a strategist is to be a framer. Someone who can take what seems a static situation and re-imagine the context, guiding metaphors, underlying assumptions, question rules and re-situate in space and time to find a more advantageous situation.
As the authors argue, framing is one of the central analytical skills, and one that is uniquely human. Machines are very good rule-followers, they can experiment and learn, but they cannot break the rules that are set for them or assumed within their code. Humans by contrast do this all the time. When we tell a joke, we're relying on the gap between your anticipated frame and what we then say for the surprise and humor. Many leading businesses also reflect significant frames. Howard Schultz realised that a coffee shop wasn't simply a place that made and sold coffee, but could be a place you'd want to visit and spend time in, hence Starbucks. Sam Walton realised that the 'store' didn't have to just be a location but could be a network, hence the success of Walmart.
Framing is not a skill we teach very often outside strategy classrooms. And it does come with a few constraints some find uncomfortable. As the authors stress, the best conditions for framing require an environment of cognitive diversity. That means it's often a team effort. Then is the matter of who is involved. Diversity of physical and lived experience is important, though it's only a partial step towards the more important element of ensuring you get a range of people who think differently about problems. Then you shouldn't just force the team into a room to find a consensus, but encourage their diversity by working on the problem separately and identifying preferred outcomes. Finally, when they come together, there needs to be a willingness to disagree, and to value the development over time of ideas, rather than simply a rapid move to an outcome.
There are limits to what framing can do. It can't overcome all material realities, and there's a risk of assuming that mere cleverness can provide a way out in every situation. That's not always true, and sometimes reflects an indulgent wish to avoid facing up to the obvious problem (see the trend for hiring endless expensive consultants). And as the authors' warn, changing frames too often is also harmful. Just because something is new or 'contrarian' thinking doesn't automatically make it superior. Finally, the gap between thought and action needs to be overcome and some frames, however analytically appealing are less helpful, even harmful, at implementation.
Overall however, 'Framers' is a compelling read on the power of human thought, and a reason for optimism that we can and will find ways to muddle our way out of the mess we today find ourselves in.
August 5, 2021
A light book about mental models, with many examples from current news of the world. I expected more depth on the psychological issues, but the tone is more journalistic and less scientific.
Análise em Português no blog Virtual Illusion:
https://virtual-illusion.blogspot.com...
Análise em Português no blog Virtual Illusion:
https://virtual-illusion.blogspot.com...
Read
June 3, 2021This was a really interesting book. It's all about our mental models (aka how we view the world) and their impact. As a user experience professional, I love how it ties how the frames we use impact our ability to innovate. If you like cognitive psychology, I highly recommend this book!
September 15, 2022
Siapa di sini yg suka belajar?
Waktu Najwa Shihab mewawancara Maudy Ayunda, ada momen di mana mereka malah senang kalau masuk musim ujian. Bagi keduanya, belajar mempersiapkan ujian itu menyenangkan.
Mamaku juga pernah cerita bahwa dia suka belajar.
...dan ternyata aku nggak jauh beda. Belakangan aku menyadari kalau aku suka belajar 😆
Belajar yg dimaksud bukan hapalan membosankan. Melainkan "making sense of information", menghubungkan titik satu dengan lainnya supaya menjadi pemahaman utuh yg nantinya membantu kita melihat dunia.
Well, itu inti yang dibahas oleh Framers bagiku. (Iya, aku terkecoh dengan anak judulnya).
Frame sendiri artinya bingkai. Yakni setelan yg kita gunakan untuk melihat sesuatu. Frame yg kita miliki saat lahir bisa berkembang dg kita sekolah. Lalu semakin berkembang & bervariasi apabila kita mau mengekspos diri dg banyak hal di luar sana. Masalahnya ialah, terpapar dg banyak keragaman lantas nggak membuat kita mau/bersedia menggunakan frame. Dg kata lain, nggak bikin orang jadi punya empati & simpati. Ini yg seringkali menjadi akar keributan di Internet 👀
For some of us, wearing multiple frames hanya buang-buang tenaga. Tapi untuk mereka yg berada pada jabatan sbg pemangku kebijakan, bisa melihat permsalahan menggunakan beragam frame malah membantu memecahkan masalah. Syukur-syukur kalau bisa dapat solusi yg inklusif.
Bukunya singkat. Cuma 9 bab yang masing-masing hanya sekitar 20an halaman. Bahasanya enteng. Buatku malah erat kaitannya dengan Think Again-nya Adam Grants. Sebab, mengeksplorasi hingga menggunakan frame yg berbeda-beda mempersyaratkan proses "unlearn" di dalamnya.
Framers barangkali merupakan salah satu buku yg kuharap sudah ada ketika aku kuliah. Beberapa bagiannya juga nggak lepas dari teori Information Behavior yg kupelajari dulu (terutama soal Making Sense Theory). Malah aku rasa, kalau sejak kuliah aku baca buku begini mungkin aku lebih punya gambaran jelas bakal bantuin patron seperti ini jika jadi pustakawan nanti.
Waktu Najwa Shihab mewawancara Maudy Ayunda, ada momen di mana mereka malah senang kalau masuk musim ujian. Bagi keduanya, belajar mempersiapkan ujian itu menyenangkan.
Mamaku juga pernah cerita bahwa dia suka belajar.
...dan ternyata aku nggak jauh beda. Belakangan aku menyadari kalau aku suka belajar 😆
Belajar yg dimaksud bukan hapalan membosankan. Melainkan "making sense of information", menghubungkan titik satu dengan lainnya supaya menjadi pemahaman utuh yg nantinya membantu kita melihat dunia.
Well, itu inti yang dibahas oleh Framers bagiku. (Iya, aku terkecoh dengan anak judulnya).
Frame sendiri artinya bingkai. Yakni setelan yg kita gunakan untuk melihat sesuatu. Frame yg kita miliki saat lahir bisa berkembang dg kita sekolah. Lalu semakin berkembang & bervariasi apabila kita mau mengekspos diri dg banyak hal di luar sana. Masalahnya ialah, terpapar dg banyak keragaman lantas nggak membuat kita mau/bersedia menggunakan frame. Dg kata lain, nggak bikin orang jadi punya empati & simpati. Ini yg seringkali menjadi akar keributan di Internet 👀
For some of us, wearing multiple frames hanya buang-buang tenaga. Tapi untuk mereka yg berada pada jabatan sbg pemangku kebijakan, bisa melihat permsalahan menggunakan beragam frame malah membantu memecahkan masalah. Syukur-syukur kalau bisa dapat solusi yg inklusif.
Bukunya singkat. Cuma 9 bab yang masing-masing hanya sekitar 20an halaman. Bahasanya enteng. Buatku malah erat kaitannya dengan Think Again-nya Adam Grants. Sebab, mengeksplorasi hingga menggunakan frame yg berbeda-beda mempersyaratkan proses "unlearn" di dalamnya.
Framers barangkali merupakan salah satu buku yg kuharap sudah ada ketika aku kuliah. Beberapa bagiannya juga nggak lepas dari teori Information Behavior yg kupelajari dulu (terutama soal Making Sense Theory). Malah aku rasa, kalau sejak kuliah aku baca buku begini mungkin aku lebih punya gambaran jelas bakal bantuin patron seperti ini jika jadi pustakawan nanti.
December 13, 2021
The usual pop psych / cognition ideas reframed in a fancy new package called "drink every time we use the word "frame"". Some interesting but brief insights around the use of human nous to direct AI in the right direction, and a useful mental framework for decision making to improve decision making (akin to the "pre mortem" popularised by freakonomics), but has too much fluff and not enough substance to warrant an entire book.
May 12, 2021
Proposes a theory of human distinctiveness based on the capacity to build and apply "mental models" (or "frames"). Such models are "a cognitive muscle" we can use to increase our alternatives and achieve better outcomes. Lots of business examples as well as "social justice" ones. A plea for cognitive pluralism as a way to recast the foundations of classical political liberalism, but one that relies heavily on a human exceptionalism which may no longer be sustainable.
July 1, 2024
Framers follows the well-worn pattern of contemporary business books. It begins with sensational tales of successful entrepreneurs and then describes some element that is key to their success which often is also the title of the book. In this case, successful people are “Framers.” The author claims that Framers are able to see things from multiple perspectives and can often discover creative solutions by re-framing the issue. The core of the idea is that framers use Causality, Counterfactuals, and Constraints to think differently about the world. Causality is looking at questioning the true cause(s) of the effects we see. Counterfactuals means using our imagination to see possible outcomes. He points out that this is uniquely human and not AI replaceable. Constraints imposed on our creativity aide rather than hinder our thinking. Constraints may be either hard or soft depending on how malleable they are.
All this is helpful to a wide array of businesses. I can see how these ideas could help me in creating workshops. Yet the author does discuss something I would call super-frames, frames that govern how we think about other frames. I appreciate that the author reaches towards this, yet is still unable to escape his own worldview. He argues for pluralism in the later chapters, the only alternative he sees is a frame that rejects all other frames. That latter frame he gives to terrorists and the like. I was disappointed the discussion here was so binary. I’m currently reading a book called God and Politics that describes 4 variations from a Christian worldview (one of which is Pluralism). The author could have reached a bit deeper here.
All in all, this book is a fine example of the genre, helpful in some areas, yet woefully inadequate when discussing anything beyond his own “super-frame.”
All this is helpful to a wide array of businesses. I can see how these ideas could help me in creating workshops. Yet the author does discuss something I would call super-frames, frames that govern how we think about other frames. I appreciate that the author reaches towards this, yet is still unable to escape his own worldview. He argues for pluralism in the later chapters, the only alternative he sees is a frame that rejects all other frames. That latter frame he gives to terrorists and the like. I was disappointed the discussion here was so binary. I’m currently reading a book called God and Politics that describes 4 variations from a Christian worldview (one of which is Pluralism). The author could have reached a bit deeper here.
All in all, this book is a fine example of the genre, helpful in some areas, yet woefully inadequate when discussing anything beyond his own “super-frame.”
July 10, 2021
"Humans think using mental models. These are representations of reality that make the world comprehensible. They allow us to see patterns, predict how things will unfold, and make sense of the circumstances we encounter."
The author points out that the mental modes we choose to apply are called frames. Frames, "determine how we understand and act in the world. Frames enable us to generalize and make abstractions that apply to other situations".
Frames, enable us as humans, to choose a frame to provide new options or focus our mind and reduce options.
Lastly, framing or cognitive analysis consists of causality, counterfactuals, and constraints.
In other words, framing is basically meant comprehending things by first discovering the cause...and then using counterfactuals (within a constrained boundary) to formulate a game plan or an idea.
The authors did a great job of presenting analogies that help bring out this concept in more depth throughout the book. In fact, this is what I would call a book with no flaws...as I read the book I can't say there was much to complain about in terms of mess-ups/ not good moments.
The only problem with this book...is that it lacked a wow factor to it in my opinion. Now, for someone who doesn't read books like that, this book will amaze you. But if you've read at least 30 non-fictional informative books in your lifetime...this book will not change the way you think or well uh... "frame" things. The book organizes an idea that most critical thinkers/readers already know about and apply subconsciously.
Moreover, like i said the book has no flaws...but it doesn't have anything that makes it stand out either. I'm not sure I'll remember this book within the next few months. It's a solid book that's worth the read...but nothing memorable.
January 7, 2022
While the pitch is interesting ("what uniquely human traits can help us deal with the challenges of the future and harness technology to our advantage"), the execution is somewhat lacklustre. The concept of a frame is kept deliberately fuzzy by the authors, presumably in order to be able to subsume a number of different aspects under the keyword, but this causes a lack of clarity that is lamentable. Our human capacity for decision-making based on quick, intuitive reasoning within well-defined existing "frames" definitely distinguishes us from current machine learning systems, but the authors spend little time working out precisely what this capacity truly is and a lot of time on how to foster more effective collaboration and "co-thinking" among different people. The writing style was also hard to bear in certain places, with a breathless mix of miniature anecdotes mixed into generic and fairly repetitive boilerplate prose("how can communities live and breathe frame pluralism successfully?"). Overall, fairly light on details, though with a somewhat convincing argument for fostering cognitive diversity in collective decision-making.
September 9, 2022
There are times in the lifetime of a business and throughout the course of our personal careers where we have to reframe and dream, but with focus. I highly recommend this read for anyone who is struggling with a business plan or professional partnership that needs to be revitalized or even keep moving forward during a good patch.
July 24, 2022
I saw this book in the airport and snagged it. It looked good. I wanted to read about frames and how they provide human advantage over AI. Yeah they mentioned that in a paragraph or two.
Mostly the book is about how great frames are, how the only bad frame is one that denies the existence of other frames. This is where I started to have so many problems with the book that I started taking notes on my phone as they came up in order to remember them.
First off, according to these folks all frames are equal and wonderful and have their place. This is nonsense. There are horrible frames. What are they? Any frame that takes the harm of an individual or others as its core motivation or justification is a bad frame. Sure there may be a society where murder/anti-whatever-group-I-want-to-subjugate is acceptable but that assumes a society with no moral structures. That's not one I want to live in.
They talk to us about using and manipulating mental frames as though this is straightforward, and in fact spend 218 pages on what they are and why they are all good, and 3 pages giving hints on how to actually work with them. Meanwhile in psychology we are working on our unacknowledged biases - and what is a bias other than a frame we are unaware we are using? There are so many assumptions that we live under that we are unaware of. Much psychological and spiritual work revolves around unpacking those and looking at how they actually play out in our lives and affect how we see the world. You cannot just up and change a frame. Sure for problem solving in business you might, but pluralism in society needs to have room for folks to understand their frame(s) and that is unaddressed.
This book suffers from what so much of our cultural thinking suffers from - the notion of the supremacy of the individual. The entire book talks about the individual's frame - there is no acknowledgement of the cultural frames we stew in, the frames that are sold to us in marketing, the frames politicians use to get us to support them, the frames our countries use to convince us that what they are doing is right. To be able to change a frame suggests access to information. There is an even greater story in how difficult it is to get information outside of the context of our frame and then be able to adequately assess the validity of that information. Or how much we are limited by the frames we live within - even in being able to re-frame.
Some of the ideas they have discovered are actually core notions of Buddhism, and likely in other philosophical and contemplative traditions that I am less familiar with. They give no acknowledgement that some of their ideas have been around for millennia and are practiced today with a much greater understanding of the pitfalls and challenges of working with "frames". The notion of reality for example has been discussed amply in both western and eastern philosophy. I'd like to see an expert in post-modernism or phenomenology or post-structuralism unpack this book. I'd make popcorn.
They confuse discernment with suppression and repression. There's some unacknowledged pseudo-libertarian frames woven into this book.
They also say there is no bad frame and then at least 3 times I counted, they mock the frame of someone who their culture tells them is inferior. And they are - surprise surprise - unaware that they are doing the very thing they are chiding us not to do, because as I stated above, they don't acknowledge the difficulty of being able to recognize or articulate our frames or the frames around us that affect us.
Anyhow, it's interesting, but in the end terribly disappointing. I kept arguing with them and having to stop and read some more and then get more frustrated. In the end, they give this rah rah lesson about how we need to embrace all the people thinking all the things as all equal or debate them together as a group. Yeah, like any organization/family/group does that and thrives? There is room for new ideas, but there are some very good reasons why not all ideas are equal, whether you position them as frames or not. There are reasons why this is not a hypothetical universe where all frames start off good. Some frames are stillborn. Others survive because there is a lot of money behind them. Some thrive because they should. Many are shot down because they are horrible. Rigidity of frame is not the same as discernment of a bad frame. That's the difference between knowledge and wisdom.
Mostly the book is about how great frames are, how the only bad frame is one that denies the existence of other frames. This is where I started to have so many problems with the book that I started taking notes on my phone as they came up in order to remember them.
First off, according to these folks all frames are equal and wonderful and have their place. This is nonsense. There are horrible frames. What are they? Any frame that takes the harm of an individual or others as its core motivation or justification is a bad frame. Sure there may be a society where murder/anti-whatever-group-I-want-to-subjugate is acceptable but that assumes a society with no moral structures. That's not one I want to live in.
They talk to us about using and manipulating mental frames as though this is straightforward, and in fact spend 218 pages on what they are and why they are all good, and 3 pages giving hints on how to actually work with them. Meanwhile in psychology we are working on our unacknowledged biases - and what is a bias other than a frame we are unaware we are using? There are so many assumptions that we live under that we are unaware of. Much psychological and spiritual work revolves around unpacking those and looking at how they actually play out in our lives and affect how we see the world. You cannot just up and change a frame. Sure for problem solving in business you might, but pluralism in society needs to have room for folks to understand their frame(s) and that is unaddressed.
This book suffers from what so much of our cultural thinking suffers from - the notion of the supremacy of the individual. The entire book talks about the individual's frame - there is no acknowledgement of the cultural frames we stew in, the frames that are sold to us in marketing, the frames politicians use to get us to support them, the frames our countries use to convince us that what they are doing is right. To be able to change a frame suggests access to information. There is an even greater story in how difficult it is to get information outside of the context of our frame and then be able to adequately assess the validity of that information. Or how much we are limited by the frames we live within - even in being able to re-frame.
Some of the ideas they have discovered are actually core notions of Buddhism, and likely in other philosophical and contemplative traditions that I am less familiar with. They give no acknowledgement that some of their ideas have been around for millennia and are practiced today with a much greater understanding of the pitfalls and challenges of working with "frames". The notion of reality for example has been discussed amply in both western and eastern philosophy. I'd like to see an expert in post-modernism or phenomenology or post-structuralism unpack this book. I'd make popcorn.
They confuse discernment with suppression and repression. There's some unacknowledged pseudo-libertarian frames woven into this book.
They also say there is no bad frame and then at least 3 times I counted, they mock the frame of someone who their culture tells them is inferior. And they are - surprise surprise - unaware that they are doing the very thing they are chiding us not to do, because as I stated above, they don't acknowledge the difficulty of being able to recognize or articulate our frames or the frames around us that affect us.
Anyhow, it's interesting, but in the end terribly disappointing. I kept arguing with them and having to stop and read some more and then get more frustrated. In the end, they give this rah rah lesson about how we need to embrace all the people thinking all the things as all equal or debate them together as a group. Yeah, like any organization/family/group does that and thrives? There is room for new ideas, but there are some very good reasons why not all ideas are equal, whether you position them as frames or not. There are reasons why this is not a hypothetical universe where all frames start off good. Some frames are stillborn. Others survive because there is a lot of money behind them. Some thrive because they should. Many are shot down because they are horrible. Rigidity of frame is not the same as discernment of a bad frame. That's the difference between knowledge and wisdom.
June 20, 2021
This is a book that organizes and characterizes how we look at the world and make decisions. Plenty of interesting examples of frames, how people changed frames, and how those changed frames changed things for them and others (e.g., the #MeToo movement). I would like more “how too” information on using frames in decision making; that was the weakest part of the book.
June 10, 2022
"Humans can adapt by relying on our cognitive capacity to generate mental models, by better envisioning consequences and choosing alternatives. Yet this requires a degree of cognitive freedom that is behind winnowed from every side. We must realize that we have what we need to survive and to thrive- provided we grasp the responsibility, courage, and imagination to accept our role as framers." Chapter one.
"There is no right frame per se. It depends on the situation and our intent ... choosing and applying a frame -- lays the groundwork for decision and action."
Intense debates between two key camps over different models of government ... in 1787, resulted in the model of the US Constitution.
The author describes the example of Apollo 11 and the use of frames to see what's not there... making us evaluate options, guiding us to our goals and shaping our broader worldview. Financial markets use it. Musicians use framing to find the best fit for a particular moment.
I think considering various perspectives in planning and agenda setting has always been used -interpretations, evaluations to produce ideal outcomes. For good communication using the right words, images that represent everyone so information is understood, phrases that sell a message and overall presenting the facts, research etc Daniel Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow (1981) shows in his book how a problem presented in different ways will produce different responses.
I am glad I came across this book this year, 2022, just to remind me of what can be taken for granted especially in media selling and promoting. It is simply written, and he includes a guide to working with frames, so we can frame and reframe wisely -it's probably already used in workshops for organizations to improve and foster imagination, innovation and dynamism in a society.
His research is intense as seen in the notes.
Some threats are sudden and unexpected. Others are slow and smoldering. Both represent cognitive blind spots for which societies are unprepared. Whether pandemics or populism, new weapons or new technologies. ..how humans respond marks the difference between survival and extinction. And how we act depends on what we see.
An excellent resource for home, school and the firm.
"There is no right frame per se. It depends on the situation and our intent ... choosing and applying a frame -- lays the groundwork for decision and action."
Intense debates between two key camps over different models of government ... in 1787, resulted in the model of the US Constitution.
The author describes the example of Apollo 11 and the use of frames to see what's not there... making us evaluate options, guiding us to our goals and shaping our broader worldview. Financial markets use it. Musicians use framing to find the best fit for a particular moment.
I think considering various perspectives in planning and agenda setting has always been used -interpretations, evaluations to produce ideal outcomes. For good communication using the right words, images that represent everyone so information is understood, phrases that sell a message and overall presenting the facts, research etc Daniel Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow (1981) shows in his book how a problem presented in different ways will produce different responses.
I am glad I came across this book this year, 2022, just to remind me of what can be taken for granted especially in media selling and promoting. It is simply written, and he includes a guide to working with frames, so we can frame and reframe wisely -it's probably already used in workshops for organizations to improve and foster imagination, innovation and dynamism in a society.
His research is intense as seen in the notes.
Some threats are sudden and unexpected. Others are slow and smoldering. Both represent cognitive blind spots for which societies are unprepared. Whether pandemics or populism, new weapons or new technologies. ..how humans respond marks the difference between survival and extinction. And how we act depends on what we see.
An excellent resource for home, school and the firm.
June 16, 2021
I picked up this book with a lot of expectations based on its reviews, only to be underwhelmed by "packaged common sense". There is not a single statement in this book that one can disagree with. And that is the unfortunate problem with this book. You read books to be shocked, surprised, challenged, provoked.
Before picking up the book, I had read some reviews talk about the insights this book offers about how humanity will cope with the looming AI era. The book comes nowhere near fulfilling that promise. That the ability to construct mental models aka "frames" is human ability, difficult for machines to emulate is not news. The 3Cs - Causality, Counterfactuals and Constraints - are good explainers of framing and "reframing" in hindsight but do little to enhance one's "framing" ability.
The five point advice in the last chapter "A guide to working with frames" is probably the most disappointing ending I have come across in any book. Here are those five points - a) Harness mental models, b) Dream with constraints, c) Reframe wisely, d) Conditions matter, e) Think beyond yourself. Seriously?
Before picking up the book, I had read some reviews talk about the insights this book offers about how humanity will cope with the looming AI era. The book comes nowhere near fulfilling that promise. That the ability to construct mental models aka "frames" is human ability, difficult for machines to emulate is not news. The 3Cs - Causality, Counterfactuals and Constraints - are good explainers of framing and "reframing" in hindsight but do little to enhance one's "framing" ability.
The five point advice in the last chapter "A guide to working with frames" is probably the most disappointing ending I have come across in any book. Here are those five points - a) Harness mental models, b) Dream with constraints, c) Reframe wisely, d) Conditions matter, e) Think beyond yourself. Seriously?
October 9, 2021
You can consider picking this book up.
Why you should read it :
- fresh perspective with connections to the idea of a system
- lots of pretty interesting stories, on how a certain product created for a different reason, solves another problem altogether.
- elaborates on a general series of step s which can help framing situations to problem solve
Why you shouldn't:
- can get very annoying with its simplistic approach.
- at the end of the day, it seemed to me that in large parts, the book's fundamental ideas were retrofitted into the event being spoken of, at times it felt to be a force-fit.
Pick it up, but be prepared to get irritated at times.
Why you should read it :
- fresh perspective with connections to the idea of a system
- lots of pretty interesting stories, on how a certain product created for a different reason, solves another problem altogether.
- elaborates on a general series of step s which can help framing situations to problem solve
Why you shouldn't:
- can get very annoying with its simplistic approach.
- at the end of the day, it seemed to me that in large parts, the book's fundamental ideas were retrofitted into the event being spoken of, at times it felt to be a force-fit.
Pick it up, but be prepared to get irritated at times.
September 18, 2021
O livro é bom, tem diversos insights e frases poderosas. Especialmente nos primeiros 4 capítulos, mas acho que de uma maneira geral ele estende algumas explicações que não precisavam.
Para designers, pessoas de negócios, para pessoas que buscam olhar por outras lentes é um livro bom para aumentar a musculatura mental para outras lentes e até imaginar um processo de ampliação de frames.
Para designers, pessoas de negócios, para pessoas que buscam olhar por outras lentes é um livro bom para aumentar a musculatura mental para outras lentes e até imaginar um processo de ampliação de frames.
September 20, 2022
Provides kind of basic understanding of mental models. I've read about the stories which illustrate the use of mental models in plenty of other books (Martin Luther King etc.). A much more insightful book on mental models is The Great Mental models by Shane Parrish and Knowledge Project gang.
December 11, 2021
A simple breakdown outlining the way that we perceive things and how this impacts our experiences in life. Interesting and a quick read.
Thank you to NetGalley for the Arc.
Thank you to NetGalley for the Arc.
February 27, 2023
Om als individu, bedrijf én samenleving te kunnen functioneren zijn frames nodig: manieren om naar de wereld te kijken. Maar, zo betogen Kenneth Cukier e.a in Framers uit 2022, steeds hetzelfde frame gebruiken beperkt je. Dit interessante boek gaat daarom in op allerlei manieren om je frame aan te passen en zelfs een heel nieuw frame te gebruiken. En als je denkt dat dat niet kan …. zit je vast in een frame.
Frames
Mijn eerste associatie bij ‘frame’ is negatief: iets op een bepaalde manier beschrijven om anderen te manipuleren. Dat blijkt onterecht. Een frame is juist nuttig en noodzakelijk. Het filtert je input zodat je betere beslissingen kunt nemen (de ‘shortcuts’ van Kahneman). En een ander frame geeft je een nieuw perspectief op de omgeving, zodat je innovatief kunt zijn (fijn voor bedrijven), of anderen beter kunt begrijpen (fijn voor de samenleving). Meer pluralisme (meer verschillende frames) in de samenleving zorgt ervoor dat we de disruptieve uitdagingen van tegenwoordig beter kunnen aangaan. En last but not least geeft framing de mensen een voorsprong op Artificial Intelligence (AI), want van perspectief wisselen kan die (nog?) niet. Het boek presenteert zo veel bekende zaken in een nieuw frame.
Een simpel maar sterk voorbeeld van individuele frames is het verplichte gebruik van mondneusmaskers: ja vanuit een gezondheidsframe, nee vanuit een vrijheidsframe. Een hofnar, of een Red Team, geeft een bedrijf een ander frame. En democratie, vrije markt en religie zijn frames van de samenleving.
Het boek gaat eerst in op wat frames precies zijn. Een onderdeel hiervan is causaliteit: oorzaak en effect. Dat maakt de wereld wat voorspelbaarder. Een ander onderdeel is tegenfeitelijk denken (counterfactual), ‘wat-als’ vragen stellen. Ook beperkingen horen erbij. Hoe minder beperkingen je frame heeft, hoe breder het is. Door bewust beperkingen uit je frame te slopen, kun je makkelijker andere opties bedenken.
Daarna behandelt het boek het veranderen van frame. Dit is handig als de omstandigheden veranderen. De kunst is natuurlijk om aan zo’n ander frame te komen. Daar zijn verschillende manieren voor. Wel is het aantal mensen die dit echt kunnen, vrij klein.
Pluralisme
Ik vond het hoofdstuk over pluralisme, veel verschillende frames in de maatschappij, veruit het interessantst. Het waarschuwt tegen het enkele frame wat samenhangt met onderdrukking: mensen mógen geen verschillende denkbeelden meer hebben. Nazi-Duitsland en de Culturele Revolutie van China zijn daar voorbeelden van. Het tegenovergestelde is pluralisme, een manier om aan andere ideeën en opties te komen om uitdagingen aan te gaan. Alle frames zijn dan toegestaan, behalve het slechte frame dat andere frames verbiedt.
Sterk hierbij is de waarschuwing (van Hannah Arendt) dat het ‘universalisme’ van het Westen, dat een liberale samenleving het beste is en dat alle landen in de wereld dat moeten hebben, óók gevaarlijk is. Het ‘opdringen’ van dat frame aan andere landen is niet succesvol en het biedt ook niet alle antwoorden op de huidige problemen (klimaatverandering en ongelijkheid lijken mij goede voorbeelden hiervan).
Natuurlijk levert pluralisme sociale spanningen op, het is niet de natuurlijke manier van samenleven. We moeten er dus actief aan werken. ‘Laat duizend frames bloeien’. Manieren om dat te doen zijn iedereen een goede opleiding geven (kritisch denken en leren framen), diversiteit accepteren, immigratie aanmoedigen en ja, de spanningen accepteren. Weer in debat gaan, niet op tv, maar op straat en in het café. Van spanningen een voordeel maken, experimenteren aanmoedigen. Zorgen dat we allemaal kunnen reframen!
Framing in een nieuw frame
Op zich biedt het boek niet veel nieuws qua kennis, veel van wat wordt beschreven is in andere boeken over psychologie of gedrag te vinden. Wat het boek bijzonder maakt is het betoog wat ermee wordt opgebouwd. Enerzijds de constatering dat framen iets typisch menselijks is, wat AI niet kan, en waar we in ‘de strijd met AI’ ons voordeel mee kunnen doen. Anderzijds de oproep om framen te leren en om pluriformiteit in de samenleving te bevorderen. Een dergelijk ‘frame’ (pun intended) las ik nog niet eerder en biedt zeker stof tot nadenken.
Het boek is vrij theoretisch en biedt weinig praktische hulp, op een summiere ‘gids voor framing’ na. Het is daarmee niet direct een zelfhulpboek. Dat gezegd hebbende is de conclusie van het betoog, zowel qua AI als qua pluriformiteit, bijzonder relevant voor bedrijven en onszelf als individuen.
De voorbeelden zijn interessant, vaak bekend en soms nieuw, maar niet altijd even goed in relatie te brengen met de lessen van het betreffende hoofdstuk. Verder is het vrij uitgebreid onderbouwd met voetnoten per hoofdstuk, die verwijzen naar boeken, websites en dergelijke. Fijn om verder te lezen en nieuwe frames te ontwikkelen!
Frames
Mijn eerste associatie bij ‘frame’ is negatief: iets op een bepaalde manier beschrijven om anderen te manipuleren. Dat blijkt onterecht. Een frame is juist nuttig en noodzakelijk. Het filtert je input zodat je betere beslissingen kunt nemen (de ‘shortcuts’ van Kahneman). En een ander frame geeft je een nieuw perspectief op de omgeving, zodat je innovatief kunt zijn (fijn voor bedrijven), of anderen beter kunt begrijpen (fijn voor de samenleving). Meer pluralisme (meer verschillende frames) in de samenleving zorgt ervoor dat we de disruptieve uitdagingen van tegenwoordig beter kunnen aangaan. En last but not least geeft framing de mensen een voorsprong op Artificial Intelligence (AI), want van perspectief wisselen kan die (nog?) niet. Het boek presenteert zo veel bekende zaken in een nieuw frame.
Een simpel maar sterk voorbeeld van individuele frames is het verplichte gebruik van mondneusmaskers: ja vanuit een gezondheidsframe, nee vanuit een vrijheidsframe. Een hofnar, of een Red Team, geeft een bedrijf een ander frame. En democratie, vrije markt en religie zijn frames van de samenleving.
Het boek gaat eerst in op wat frames precies zijn. Een onderdeel hiervan is causaliteit: oorzaak en effect. Dat maakt de wereld wat voorspelbaarder. Een ander onderdeel is tegenfeitelijk denken (counterfactual), ‘wat-als’ vragen stellen. Ook beperkingen horen erbij. Hoe minder beperkingen je frame heeft, hoe breder het is. Door bewust beperkingen uit je frame te slopen, kun je makkelijker andere opties bedenken.
Daarna behandelt het boek het veranderen van frame. Dit is handig als de omstandigheden veranderen. De kunst is natuurlijk om aan zo’n ander frame te komen. Daar zijn verschillende manieren voor. Wel is het aantal mensen die dit echt kunnen, vrij klein.
Pluralisme
Ik vond het hoofdstuk over pluralisme, veel verschillende frames in de maatschappij, veruit het interessantst. Het waarschuwt tegen het enkele frame wat samenhangt met onderdrukking: mensen mógen geen verschillende denkbeelden meer hebben. Nazi-Duitsland en de Culturele Revolutie van China zijn daar voorbeelden van. Het tegenovergestelde is pluralisme, een manier om aan andere ideeën en opties te komen om uitdagingen aan te gaan. Alle frames zijn dan toegestaan, behalve het slechte frame dat andere frames verbiedt.
Sterk hierbij is de waarschuwing (van Hannah Arendt) dat het ‘universalisme’ van het Westen, dat een liberale samenleving het beste is en dat alle landen in de wereld dat moeten hebben, óók gevaarlijk is. Het ‘opdringen’ van dat frame aan andere landen is niet succesvol en het biedt ook niet alle antwoorden op de huidige problemen (klimaatverandering en ongelijkheid lijken mij goede voorbeelden hiervan).
Natuurlijk levert pluralisme sociale spanningen op, het is niet de natuurlijke manier van samenleven. We moeten er dus actief aan werken. ‘Laat duizend frames bloeien’. Manieren om dat te doen zijn iedereen een goede opleiding geven (kritisch denken en leren framen), diversiteit accepteren, immigratie aanmoedigen en ja, de spanningen accepteren. Weer in debat gaan, niet op tv, maar op straat en in het café. Van spanningen een voordeel maken, experimenteren aanmoedigen. Zorgen dat we allemaal kunnen reframen!
Framing in een nieuw frame
Op zich biedt het boek niet veel nieuws qua kennis, veel van wat wordt beschreven is in andere boeken over psychologie of gedrag te vinden. Wat het boek bijzonder maakt is het betoog wat ermee wordt opgebouwd. Enerzijds de constatering dat framen iets typisch menselijks is, wat AI niet kan, en waar we in ‘de strijd met AI’ ons voordeel mee kunnen doen. Anderzijds de oproep om framen te leren en om pluriformiteit in de samenleving te bevorderen. Een dergelijk ‘frame’ (pun intended) las ik nog niet eerder en biedt zeker stof tot nadenken.
Het boek is vrij theoretisch en biedt weinig praktische hulp, op een summiere ‘gids voor framing’ na. Het is daarmee niet direct een zelfhulpboek. Dat gezegd hebbende is de conclusie van het betoog, zowel qua AI als qua pluriformiteit, bijzonder relevant voor bedrijven en onszelf als individuen.
De voorbeelden zijn interessant, vaak bekend en soms nieuw, maar niet altijd even goed in relatie te brengen met de lessen van het betreffende hoofdstuk. Verder is het vrij uitgebreid onderbouwd met voetnoten per hoofdstuk, die verwijzen naar boeken, websites en dergelijke. Fijn om verder te lezen en nieuwe frames te ontwikkelen!
January 15, 2022
CUKIER, Kenneth; MAYER-SCHÖNBERGER, Viktor; VERICOURT, Francis de: „FRAMERS – Wie wir bessere Entscheidungen treffen und warum uns Maschinen um diese Stärke immer beneiden werden“, München 2022
Eine, im Untertitel gewagte Aussage. Der Chef von IBM sagte unmittelbar nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg, dass unsere Welt maximal 3 Computer benötigt. Das erscheint heute lächerlich. Ob es diesem Buch auch einmal so gehen wird? Die Autoren liefern aber interessante Ansätze zum Nachdenken.
Frames werden mit drei Dimensionen definiert:
• kausales Schlussfolgern
• kontrafaktisches Träumen
• Fokusierung der Vorstellungen
Jeder Mensch hat „Frames“ im Kopf. Sie können vorgefertigte, oft verwendete oder neu definierte, erfundene sein.
Dem Computer und der künstlichen Intelligenz wird eine Abfuhr erteilt: „Wir Menschen werden schlauer, weil wir es verstehen, von den Errungenschaften der künstlichen Intelligenz zu lernen. Die Bedeutung des Lernens zu ermessen und das Gelernte entsprechend anzuwenden, ist etwas, wozu künstliche Intelligenz selbst nicht in der Lage ist.“ (Seite 27)
Im Grunde genommen beschreiben die Autoren mit „Frames“ etwas, was es immer schon gab und immer schon angewendet wurde, nur hatte es andere Namen wie „Modelle“, „vorgefertigte Denkmuster“. Diese basierten auf eigenen Erfahrungen oder waren in die Zukunft gerichtete neue Ideen. Bei diesen Vorgangsweisen werden auch der österreichische Bergsteiger Messner und Habeler vorgestellt, die den Stil des Klettern verändert haben. Sie waren die ersten, die den höchsten Berg der Welt ohne Sauerstoffflaschen bestiegen haben.
Nun, „die Bereitschafft, Althergebrachtes infrage zu stellen und neue kognitive Wege zu gehen“ (Seite 146) war immer schon eine wichtige Prämisse, auch wenn sie noch nicht „Frame“ genannt wurde.
Veränderungen gab es auch in Zyklen, wie etwa nach den „ausgelassenen“ 20er und 30er Jahren des 20. Jahrhunderts, die sehr viel Neues hervorbrachten, folgten in vielen Ländern zentralistische Diktaturen. Der Pluralismus der Gesellschaft wurde zurückgedrängt und vieles gleichgeschalten.
Das Buch beschäftigt sich mit Situationen aus der Vergangenheit, anhand derer die Funktion der „Frames“ beschrieben wurden. So greifen die Autoren auf den Mediziner Semmelweis oder die israelische Armee bei der Befreiung von Geiseln in Mogadischu zurück. Auch der österreichische Weinskandal und die darauffolgende Veränderung auf Qualitätswein kamen ins Buch, weil die Weinbauern ihre Frames verändert haben und von Quantität auf Qualität umgeschwenkt sind.
In die Zukunft wird ganz am Schluss geblickt. Wie soll ein Framer des 21. Jahrhunderts aussehen? „Gepflegt und gefördert werden muss die geistige Beweglichkeit, die uns die unausgesprochene Idee, das unartikulierte Ideal die latente Vorstellung und potenzielle neue Wirklichkeit begreifen lässt. Damit Framing erfolgreich ist, brauchen wir Agilität im Kopf.“ (Seite 223) Viele Schwierigkeiten, wie der Klimakonflikt, wirtschaftliche Ungleichheit, Pandemien, Populismus, algorithmischer Autoritarismus lägen noch vor uns. Nach einem halben Jahrhundert des bequemlichen Lebens mit Stabilität geht die Menschheit neuen Zielen entgegen.
Zum Schluss bieten die Autoren eine „Anleitung zum Arbeiten mit Frames“.
Es ist kein wissenschaftliches Buch, sondern ein populärwissenschaftliches, das aber leicht zu lesen und gut verständlich ist.
Eine, im Untertitel gewagte Aussage. Der Chef von IBM sagte unmittelbar nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg, dass unsere Welt maximal 3 Computer benötigt. Das erscheint heute lächerlich. Ob es diesem Buch auch einmal so gehen wird? Die Autoren liefern aber interessante Ansätze zum Nachdenken.
Frames werden mit drei Dimensionen definiert:
• kausales Schlussfolgern
• kontrafaktisches Träumen
• Fokusierung der Vorstellungen
Jeder Mensch hat „Frames“ im Kopf. Sie können vorgefertigte, oft verwendete oder neu definierte, erfundene sein.
Dem Computer und der künstlichen Intelligenz wird eine Abfuhr erteilt: „Wir Menschen werden schlauer, weil wir es verstehen, von den Errungenschaften der künstlichen Intelligenz zu lernen. Die Bedeutung des Lernens zu ermessen und das Gelernte entsprechend anzuwenden, ist etwas, wozu künstliche Intelligenz selbst nicht in der Lage ist.“ (Seite 27)
Im Grunde genommen beschreiben die Autoren mit „Frames“ etwas, was es immer schon gab und immer schon angewendet wurde, nur hatte es andere Namen wie „Modelle“, „vorgefertigte Denkmuster“. Diese basierten auf eigenen Erfahrungen oder waren in die Zukunft gerichtete neue Ideen. Bei diesen Vorgangsweisen werden auch der österreichische Bergsteiger Messner und Habeler vorgestellt, die den Stil des Klettern verändert haben. Sie waren die ersten, die den höchsten Berg der Welt ohne Sauerstoffflaschen bestiegen haben.
Nun, „die Bereitschafft, Althergebrachtes infrage zu stellen und neue kognitive Wege zu gehen“ (Seite 146) war immer schon eine wichtige Prämisse, auch wenn sie noch nicht „Frame“ genannt wurde.
Veränderungen gab es auch in Zyklen, wie etwa nach den „ausgelassenen“ 20er und 30er Jahren des 20. Jahrhunderts, die sehr viel Neues hervorbrachten, folgten in vielen Ländern zentralistische Diktaturen. Der Pluralismus der Gesellschaft wurde zurückgedrängt und vieles gleichgeschalten.
Das Buch beschäftigt sich mit Situationen aus der Vergangenheit, anhand derer die Funktion der „Frames“ beschrieben wurden. So greifen die Autoren auf den Mediziner Semmelweis oder die israelische Armee bei der Befreiung von Geiseln in Mogadischu zurück. Auch der österreichische Weinskandal und die darauffolgende Veränderung auf Qualitätswein kamen ins Buch, weil die Weinbauern ihre Frames verändert haben und von Quantität auf Qualität umgeschwenkt sind.
In die Zukunft wird ganz am Schluss geblickt. Wie soll ein Framer des 21. Jahrhunderts aussehen? „Gepflegt und gefördert werden muss die geistige Beweglichkeit, die uns die unausgesprochene Idee, das unartikulierte Ideal die latente Vorstellung und potenzielle neue Wirklichkeit begreifen lässt. Damit Framing erfolgreich ist, brauchen wir Agilität im Kopf.“ (Seite 223) Viele Schwierigkeiten, wie der Klimakonflikt, wirtschaftliche Ungleichheit, Pandemien, Populismus, algorithmischer Autoritarismus lägen noch vor uns. Nach einem halben Jahrhundert des bequemlichen Lebens mit Stabilität geht die Menschheit neuen Zielen entgegen.
Zum Schluss bieten die Autoren eine „Anleitung zum Arbeiten mit Frames“.
Es ist kein wissenschaftliches Buch, sondern ein populärwissenschaftliches, das aber leicht zu lesen und gut verständlich ist.
July 1, 2023
Artificial intelligence wordt steeds 'slimmer', maar wij mensen hebben een geheim: wij kunnen framen.
Dit boek is vooral relevant voor marketeers die verder willen kijken dan winstmaximalisatie. Bij meervoudige waardecreatie is het bewust gebruiken van frames een interessante manier om vanuit meerdere perspectieven te analyseren en beslissen.
Framing, maar dan anders
Mensen, zeker marketeers en politici, gebruiken frames om informatie zo te (her)kaderen dat het onze mening of gedrag beïnvloedt. Aan de andere kant van dezelfde medaille beschrijven gedragswetenschappers het ‘framing-effect’ als een zwakte van het menselijk redeneringsproces. In het boek Framers – Wat mensen beter kunnen dan computers hanteren de auteurs dezelfde term, maar in een andere betekenis: het gaat niet om de manier waarop zaken gepositioneerd of ervaren worden, maar om het opzettelijk toepassen van frames.
Door het bewust inzetten van frames kunnen we andere opties zien en betere besluiten nemen. Of je frames nu beschrijft als perspectieven, representaties, mentale modellen of cognitieve sjablonen, in de kern gaat het niet om wat je wel en niet ziet, maar om wat je door de frames kunt zien.
Marketeers: Van misleiding naar meervoudige waardecreatie
Hoewel het boek niet specifiek gericht is op marketeers, bevat het wel veel interessante aanknopingspunten. Zo moet een marketeer als geen ander in staat zijn om door de ogen van de (potentiële) klant te kijken. Dat is een prima frame om tot betere marketingbesluiten te komen. Maar ook een langetermijnperspectief op nieuwe kansen en bedreigingen heeft baat bij het kunnen inzetten van frames.
Het boek is vooral relevant voor marketeers die verder willen kijken dan winstmaximalisatie. Bij meervoudige waardecreatie is het bewust gebruiken van frames een interessante manier om vanuit meerdere perspectieven te analyseren en beslissen.
Kan AI ook framen?
AI-systemen kunnen zeker helpen bij het framen van informatie. Met de komst van ChatGPT zijn er alweer meer mogelijkheden dan bij het verschijnen van dit boek. Ook deze ontwikkeling ondersteunt de gedachten dat het de mens is die uiteindelijk goed begrip moeten hebben van de context, de juiste vragen moet stellen, en de mogelijke gevolgen van verschillende keuzes moet overzien.
De balans tussen rigoureus nadenken en begrensde fantasie.
Om een goede framer te worden gaan de auteurs uitvoerig in op allerlei aspecten van de menselijke cognitie. Van causaliteit en tegen feitelijk denken, tot begrenzen en herkaderen. In de eerste 240 pagina’s zitten de inzichten soms verstopt in de vele voorbeelden en wetenschappelijke verklaringen, om vervolgen in de laatste vijf pagina’s te worden omgezet in korte gids voor het werken met frames.
Het is geen makkelijk leesbaar boek en staat ook niet bomvol met nieuwe inzichten. Maar als lezer word je zeker uitgedaagd om over je eigen denken na te denken. Als je beter en bewuster frames wil inzetten, is het de tijdsinvestering meer dan waard.
Dit boek is vooral relevant voor marketeers die verder willen kijken dan winstmaximalisatie. Bij meervoudige waardecreatie is het bewust gebruiken van frames een interessante manier om vanuit meerdere perspectieven te analyseren en beslissen.
Framing, maar dan anders
Mensen, zeker marketeers en politici, gebruiken frames om informatie zo te (her)kaderen dat het onze mening of gedrag beïnvloedt. Aan de andere kant van dezelfde medaille beschrijven gedragswetenschappers het ‘framing-effect’ als een zwakte van het menselijk redeneringsproces. In het boek Framers – Wat mensen beter kunnen dan computers hanteren de auteurs dezelfde term, maar in een andere betekenis: het gaat niet om de manier waarop zaken gepositioneerd of ervaren worden, maar om het opzettelijk toepassen van frames.
Door het bewust inzetten van frames kunnen we andere opties zien en betere besluiten nemen. Of je frames nu beschrijft als perspectieven, representaties, mentale modellen of cognitieve sjablonen, in de kern gaat het niet om wat je wel en niet ziet, maar om wat je door de frames kunt zien.
Marketeers: Van misleiding naar meervoudige waardecreatie
Hoewel het boek niet specifiek gericht is op marketeers, bevat het wel veel interessante aanknopingspunten. Zo moet een marketeer als geen ander in staat zijn om door de ogen van de (potentiële) klant te kijken. Dat is een prima frame om tot betere marketingbesluiten te komen. Maar ook een langetermijnperspectief op nieuwe kansen en bedreigingen heeft baat bij het kunnen inzetten van frames.
Het boek is vooral relevant voor marketeers die verder willen kijken dan winstmaximalisatie. Bij meervoudige waardecreatie is het bewust gebruiken van frames een interessante manier om vanuit meerdere perspectieven te analyseren en beslissen.
Kan AI ook framen?
AI-systemen kunnen zeker helpen bij het framen van informatie. Met de komst van ChatGPT zijn er alweer meer mogelijkheden dan bij het verschijnen van dit boek. Ook deze ontwikkeling ondersteunt de gedachten dat het de mens is die uiteindelijk goed begrip moeten hebben van de context, de juiste vragen moet stellen, en de mogelijke gevolgen van verschillende keuzes moet overzien.
De balans tussen rigoureus nadenken en begrensde fantasie.
Om een goede framer te worden gaan de auteurs uitvoerig in op allerlei aspecten van de menselijke cognitie. Van causaliteit en tegen feitelijk denken, tot begrenzen en herkaderen. In de eerste 240 pagina’s zitten de inzichten soms verstopt in de vele voorbeelden en wetenschappelijke verklaringen, om vervolgen in de laatste vijf pagina’s te worden omgezet in korte gids voor het werken met frames.
Het is geen makkelijk leesbaar boek en staat ook niet bomvol met nieuwe inzichten. Maar als lezer word je zeker uitgedaagd om over je eigen denken na te denken. Als je beter en bewuster frames wil inzetten, is het de tijdsinvestering meer dan waard.
January 26, 2023
Я редко ставлю низкие оценки книжкам, потому что плохие просто не дочитываю. Эта была на грани, дочитал из-за того, что выписал много цитат, хоть и страдал в перерыве между ними. Вся книжка ощущается как одно большое предисловие к чему-то более интересному. Да, есть интересные факты и истории, но как книга это не работает, общая мысль получилась на уровне «хорошо, когда есть разные способы смотреть на объекты, это важно и это умение нужно тренировать». Повторяется эта мысль чуть ли не в каждой главе (возможно, проблема в трех авторах, каждый из который повторяет ее по-своему).
Также узнал, что Стивен Спилберг – школьный друг известного футуролога Питера Шварца. Своя 57 школа есть не только в Москве, видимо.
Цитаты:
«In experiments, researchers have identified an interesting wrinkle. We may believe that human activity is quite mutable, but in our counterfactuals, we prefer imagining behavioral changes that fall within widely accepted social norms. While waiting in a taxi line when late for a meeting, for instance, we may think about jumping on our phone to call an Uber. But we less frequently think of jumping the queue.»
«Today Gopnik is the leader in a field of psychology known as “theory theory.” The idea is that very young children use the same form of causal and counterfactual reasoning, and develop mental models, as scientists use when performing experiments (i.e., it is the theory that babies think theoretically). When scientists reason in this way, it’s referred to as “research”; for toddlers, we call it “getting into everything,” she explains.»
«Frames also liberate us, because we can select them based on what aspects of reality we want to highlight. By deliberately trying out alternative frames, we go far beyond the animal that follows its instincts or the machine that adheres to its instructions. As we see the world from different vantage points, we enrich our understanding and come up with better solutions»
«Perhaps the geeks resemble clones of one another because they have all gone through Joel Podolny’s classes at Apple University only to strive to “think different” in the same way.»
«Will.i.am figured he could change the constraints of the business model: sell to companies the rights to use his upcoming tracks in their marketing, but retain all the other rights to the song, which he could monetize. Loaded with funds before he walked into the recording studio, he could use the money to make the best possible songs, so they had a chance to become hits, he explains with a wide grin.»
«Normally we learn when we receive information: when a teacher instructs, a book describes, an apprentice tinkers. But in the case of causal explanations, the person who imparts information, who does the explaining, actually learns as well. This insight is the work of Tania Lombrozo, a psychology professor at Princeton and rising star in the field, who is pioneering a new science of explanation.»
Также узнал, что Стивен Спилберг – школьный друг известного футуролога Питера Шварца. Своя 57 школа есть не только в Москве, видимо.
Цитаты:
«In experiments, researchers have identified an interesting wrinkle. We may believe that human activity is quite mutable, but in our counterfactuals, we prefer imagining behavioral changes that fall within widely accepted social norms. While waiting in a taxi line when late for a meeting, for instance, we may think about jumping on our phone to call an Uber. But we less frequently think of jumping the queue.»
«Today Gopnik is the leader in a field of psychology known as “theory theory.” The idea is that very young children use the same form of causal and counterfactual reasoning, and develop mental models, as scientists use when performing experiments (i.e., it is the theory that babies think theoretically). When scientists reason in this way, it’s referred to as “research”; for toddlers, we call it “getting into everything,” she explains.»
«Frames also liberate us, because we can select them based on what aspects of reality we want to highlight. By deliberately trying out alternative frames, we go far beyond the animal that follows its instincts or the machine that adheres to its instructions. As we see the world from different vantage points, we enrich our understanding and come up with better solutions»
«Perhaps the geeks resemble clones of one another because they have all gone through Joel Podolny’s classes at Apple University only to strive to “think different” in the same way.»
«Will.i.am figured he could change the constraints of the business model: sell to companies the rights to use his upcoming tracks in their marketing, but retain all the other rights to the song, which he could monetize. Loaded with funds before he walked into the recording studio, he could use the money to make the best possible songs, so they had a chance to become hits, he explains with a wide grin.»
«Normally we learn when we receive information: when a teacher instructs, a book describes, an apprentice tinkers. But in the case of causal explanations, the person who imparts information, who does the explaining, actually learns as well. This insight is the work of Tania Lombrozo, a psychology professor at Princeton and rising star in the field, who is pioneering a new science of explanation.»
November 14, 2021
I have always been on a soapbox about what I call "schemas": mental models that we build to support our different areas of knowledge. I am a firm believer that one can only master a subject if they have a strong schema to support it. However, in many (and maybe most) cases, I feel like our schemas are built when we are very young; and we all end up building some good schemas and some not-so-good schemas. If we are lucky, we happen to build good schemas around math or language or music, and get all of the benefits that accrue with those subjects. In other words, luck, in the form of which "good" schemas we build, tends to make us be good at certain things and bad at others. Add to that the fact that these schemas seem to be extremely difficult to tear down and rebuild, and my view on an individual's potential for success starts sounding cynically like more of a crapshoot than any kind self-determined drive or effort.
In this book, the team of Culkiier/Mayer-Schonberger/de Vericourt reframe my schema idea as "frames". (And of course I am being facetious here -- these guys don't know me from Adam, and the only people I have ever ranted to about "schemas" are my wife and kids.) They also propose that people reframe things all the time; and while there is a risk and a cost to reframe something, it can be done, and in fact, has led to many of our biggest successes in human history. This book explains what frames are, how to use them appropriately, and ways to make reframing less difficult. In other words, this book is hopeful. Granted, the author team feels that we are in a very dangerous and pivotal time in our history, but believes that a societal awareness of and individuals' deftness in using frames is just what we need to get us through our current challenges.
In particular, and something I never thought about, is that it is important to be able to apply several frames to the same problem simultaneously in order to properly understand it and solve it. They use the great Fitzgerald quote about how people can "hold two opposing ideas in the mind at the same time" and propose that this approach is just the ticket for our current malaise.
All in all, not a breakthrough set of ideas here, but it is nice to see these ideas actually written down and fleshed out. The "guide to working with frames" section at the back of the book is a great reference and can almost be used as a starting point to where in the book you might want to jump and read more detail.
In this book, the team of Culkiier/Mayer-Schonberger/de Vericourt reframe my schema idea as "frames". (And of course I am being facetious here -- these guys don't know me from Adam, and the only people I have ever ranted to about "schemas" are my wife and kids.) They also propose that people reframe things all the time; and while there is a risk and a cost to reframe something, it can be done, and in fact, has led to many of our biggest successes in human history. This book explains what frames are, how to use them appropriately, and ways to make reframing less difficult. In other words, this book is hopeful. Granted, the author team feels that we are in a very dangerous and pivotal time in our history, but believes that a societal awareness of and individuals' deftness in using frames is just what we need to get us through our current challenges.
In particular, and something I never thought about, is that it is important to be able to apply several frames to the same problem simultaneously in order to properly understand it and solve it. They use the great Fitzgerald quote about how people can "hold two opposing ideas in the mind at the same time" and propose that this approach is just the ticket for our current malaise.
All in all, not a breakthrough set of ideas here, but it is nice to see these ideas actually written down and fleshed out. The "guide to working with frames" section at the back of the book is a great reference and can almost be used as a starting point to where in the book you might want to jump and read more detail.
August 10, 2021
This book was interesting as a concept, but tended to reiterate points it had already made. I feel like this could have been a pamphlet or a long-form essay. Basically, learning to view problems through a different lens (or “frame”) is oftentimes better than getting hung up on the question itself. Finding a range of ways to look at a problem, narrowing it down by the impossible and improbable, narrowing it down more by your own set of rules and limitations, and then testing out the frames that remain will usually lead to a sustainable answer. If not, start over and reconsider your limits.
My main problems with this book were threefold:
1) the repetition. I feel like there was a lot of dead horse beating.
2) the obsession with alliteration and cutesy memory tricks. Once or twice is fine. Not every list has to have a schtick.
3) the mother of all issues. It is simply “myriad.” I swear to all the gods, it is not “a myriad of”. “Myriad” means “many”. You wouldn’t say “a many of”. So just say “myriad.” This happened myriad times throughout this book. (Speaking of which, take a second to educate yourself on the proper use of “comprise”. Guarantee you’re probably using it wrong. But that’s forgivable because it sounds so strange to use it correctly. This is by no means a judgment, simply letting you know. It’s a weird word. “The band comprises 13 members”. So weird).
Anyway, skim this. If anything, take a few seconds to review the guide at the back. It’s basically the whole book, stupid cutesy naming and all.
My main problems with this book were threefold:
1) the repetition. I feel like there was a lot of dead horse beating.
2) the obsession with alliteration and cutesy memory tricks. Once or twice is fine. Not every list has to have a schtick.
3) the mother of all issues. It is simply “myriad.” I swear to all the gods, it is not “a myriad of”. “Myriad” means “many”. You wouldn’t say “a many of”. So just say “myriad.” This happened myriad times throughout this book. (Speaking of which, take a second to educate yourself on the proper use of “comprise”. Guarantee you’re probably using it wrong. But that’s forgivable because it sounds so strange to use it correctly. This is by no means a judgment, simply letting you know. It’s a weird word. “The band comprises 13 members”. So weird).
Anyway, skim this. If anything, take a few seconds to review the guide at the back. It’s basically the whole book, stupid cutesy naming and all.
September 22, 2021
Okay book to learn how to better problem solve or be innovative with something that looks like a practical framework, as supposed to other "feel good" business book. Could have been shorter/less repetitive.
Key points for me where to acknowledge that no one really sees the world as it is, but we all have frames (lenses) that help us interpret the world. This will help you be more understanding of others perspectives and humble to accept when your framework is wrong.
I like the point that "thinking outside the box" is a useless advice, because what counts as outside the box is actually part of someone else randomly framed box. Instead, more practical tips are given to decide what constraints are useful and which ones are better to remove. It's only important to understand that key constraints will always be needed to define the end result.
Lastly, I like his reminder that even when you come with a great framework that is completely new, you still need to remember that you may have to change your framework when evidence points to do so. The author ij particular calls out Albert Einstein for his ability to think about spacetime and his inability to accept quantum phenomena.
Key points for me where to acknowledge that no one really sees the world as it is, but we all have frames (lenses) that help us interpret the world. This will help you be more understanding of others perspectives and humble to accept when your framework is wrong.
I like the point that "thinking outside the box" is a useless advice, because what counts as outside the box is actually part of someone else randomly framed box. Instead, more practical tips are given to decide what constraints are useful and which ones are better to remove. It's only important to understand that key constraints will always be needed to define the end result.
Lastly, I like his reminder that even when you come with a great framework that is completely new, you still need to remember that you may have to change your framework when evidence points to do so. The author ij particular calls out Albert Einstein for his ability to think about spacetime and his inability to accept quantum phenomena.
August 15, 2022
A nice reading about human cognitive psychology. This book consists of 9 chapters, systematically explains about 'framing', how it makes us human and why we're different from other species and AI. There are 3 components of 'framing', causality, counterfactuality and constraint. Each got a chapter. According to this book, what makes us different from, let's say, AI, because to make progress or invention, it also includes risk-taking.
Some 3 last chapters talking about reframing and the importance of learning and diversity. Interesting and it comes with examples.
However, I think it talks about comparison between human intelligence and AI too little. I expected more as it promised on the subtitle. But if you're interested in human cognitive function or, probably, behavioral science, it's a nice one.
Some 3 last chapters talking about reframing and the importance of learning and diversity. Interesting and it comes with examples.
However, I think it talks about comparison between human intelligence and AI too little. I expected more as it promised on the subtitle. But if you're interested in human cognitive function or, probably, behavioral science, it's a nice one.
November 4, 2022
This book makes a convincing case across multiple subject areas for the critical importance of critical thinking approached through the storage and use of often contrasting points if view.
The book uses examples from the industrial revolution to date to show that most important developments, whether it be Artifical Intelligence, vaccines, flight by the Wright brothers and even Ivy League education has all been bolstered and made possible as we know it because the rare few dared to challenge the status quo using 3 human super powers, which are the under current of this entire book. Namely: causality, counterfactual and constraints
A wonderful book for those who are seeking a to explore novel solutions and the possible boons and banes of travelling along the less troden path.
Excellent for undergraduates and those seeking knowledge for the love knowledge.
The book uses examples from the industrial revolution to date to show that most important developments, whether it be Artifical Intelligence, vaccines, flight by the Wright brothers and even Ivy League education has all been bolstered and made possible as we know it because the rare few dared to challenge the status quo using 3 human super powers, which are the under current of this entire book. Namely: causality, counterfactual and constraints
A wonderful book for those who are seeking a to explore novel solutions and the possible boons and banes of travelling along the less troden path.
Excellent for undergraduates and those seeking knowledge for the love knowledge.
September 20, 2023
Pretty pop psych stuff, which normally wouldn't be egregiously bad, but the author shoehorns in nonsense about "both sides" of the political spectrum being equally to blame for division, for example:
I'm sorry but in what universe are those groups at all comparable. Did the author forget the last few years?
Also book features this all-time banger sentence: "It's hard to imagine how we are going to feed the planet, care for its sick, and power our glistening Teslas without AI embedded in all that we do."
It's not a left-right thing: the appeal of emotionalism trasnscends ideological categorization. Emotionalists are found among liberals who oppose vaccines and conservatives who reject global warming. Both sides revel in extremes....
I'm sorry but in what universe are those groups at all comparable. Did the author forget the last few years?
Also book features this all-time banger sentence: "It's hard to imagine how we are going to feed the planet, care for its sick, and power our glistening Teslas without AI embedded in all that we do."
July 15, 2022
This book had me hooked from the first chapter and carried me all the way through and I can say I both enjoyed and found extremely useful for my career and also as a new father. The subject matter was extremely interesting as it informed my unexperienced knowledge about the world of AI and instead of being afraid of being 'replaced' by the technology, it celebrated the human input and capabilities to frame and work with abstract concepts, something that AI is unable to do. I can't wait now to come back from my holidays and start to put to use the ideas and methods of framing to further enhance my personal and professional lives
July 30, 2023
AI processes data faster than humans ever will. But our mind’s capacity to see a problem not simply through data but from multiple lenses is still unparalleled. Can cognitive science help us train that muscle and keep the upper hand? Past the convincing first half “framing” the question, this increasingly tedious series of anecdotes about the wonders of out-of-the-box thinking gradually loses sight of its main topic, how framers compare to the progress of data-based machine. Unsurprisingly, it ends on a call for diversity to help corporation and democracies that is as heart-warming as it is irrelevant to the main question.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 67 reviews